While I understand that mobile games are important I can't help but think they are a step in the wrong direction. Most of them are terrible. Truely awful. And many of the ones that succeed have the annoying or downright dangerous IAP model that you point out in the article. When you hear a mobile game designer talk about a game it is terrifying. They are often built to take advantage of people. the whales you mention in the article.

When I play a mobile game, I don't do it to have fun. I do it to kill time. They are like the reality television of games. You only watch it because it is on and when it is over you feel shallow for some reason.

I'm most certainly not a fan of the Freemium model. The reason being that your money is spent on consumables (temporary in-game items that are quickly used up), rather than permanent benefits (ie, a license to play the full game all the way through with no ads).

In my opinion, the quality of a lot of games has suffered as well, with developers increasingly designing games that are insanely difficult unless you spend real money to buy lots of gimmicky "power-ups" to get through the level. Anyway, as a result I refuse to spend money on in-app purchases such as these, unless it gives me a permanent benefit (ie, unlocking a level pack or something).

I detest games that use a virtual currency. IAP is fine for buying additional expansion packs or "chapters" but it isn't fine when you have to keep buying items ad infinitum to simply progress in the game. I have stopped downloading these types of "free" games entirely.

For some users, the freemium model can be actively counter-productive.

When I found myself going for a third go to buy extras to get through a Candy Crush level, I let my finger hover over the button and stop. I wan't going to let myself become a whale, and stopped playing the game entirely. I've never touched it since, nor any of King's other games. I don't see that changing in any great hurry.

Remember keys? I've been through several smartphones and in my opinion, the OS is just one factor when we think about games. I think what I'll miss the most (untill they come back again in haptic form or some other way) are real keys. Case in point: Emulators. The best experience playing, for example, NES games was on a humble Palm Treo 680. Why? I could control the games without having to obscure the screen or carrying a big controller. Now go ahead and tell me I'm a fool but, for those who remember, wasn't it a lot of fun back then even with a slow cpu and virtually no memory?

I hate freemium games, they are one of the worst things that has ever happened to the gaming industry. I would love to be able to get a 'demo' of the game and if it looks great, be able to buy the full version, which is not locked down is some way kind of forcing you to spend the real money on it. There is a South Park episode (s18e06), which explains the freemium model pretty good.

What gets me is that my iPhone is definitely more powerful in near every metric than an Xbox 360/PS3 (except raw paper SIMD, for the cell, but the 360 never suffered for it, but that's a whole nother discussion). Those consoles were capable of putting out AAA blockbuster titles just fine.

Now that there's hundreds of Gflops burning a hole in my pocket (hopefully not literally), I want depth, man! What we usually get on phones is games you can get into and out of in minutes, shallow and quick, or freemium. Those can be ok waiting in a short line or something, but when you set down for a while, I want games with some depth on them, and using controllers like the gamevice.

Modern high end phones should be perfectly capable of good in depth experiences like that. If AAA titles were given the budget for them, they could be pretty Switch-ey.

What gets me is that my iPhone is definitely more powerful in near every metric than an Xbox 360/PS3 (except raw paper SIMD, for the cell, but the 360 never suffered for it, but that's a whole nother discussion). Those consoles were capable of putting out AAA blockbuster titles just fine.

Now that there's hundreds of Gflops burning a hole in my pocket (hopefully not literally), I want depth, man! What we usually get on phones is games you can get into and out of in minutes, shallow and quick, or freemium. Those can be ok waiting in a short line or something, but when you set down for a while, I want games with some depth on them, and using controllers like the gamevice.

Modern high end phones should be perfectly capable of good in depth experiences like that. If AAA titles were given the budget for them, they could be pretty Switch-ey.

While I understand that mobile games are important I can't help but think they are a step in the wrong direction. Most of them are terrible. Truely awful. And many of the ones that succeed have the annoying or downright dangerous IAP model that you point out in the article. When you hear a mobile game designer talk about a game it is terrifying. They are often built to take advantage of people. the whales you mention in the article.

When I play a mobile game, I don't do it to have fun. I do it to kill time. They are like the reality television of games. You only watch it because it is on and when it is over you feel shallow for some reason.

Yea, to me they have more in common with slot machines than Super Mario Bros. or Final Fantasy. Not fun at all. It's certainly possible to have good games on mobile and there are some but you do have to wade through an extreme amount of garbage. It makes the Atari 2600 lineup look like a collection of greatest hits in comparison. Plus with the price of "free" I'm not sure we'll have something like the video game crash of 1983 to have developers and publishers step back and realize they are just outputting trash. And annoyingly all these microtransaction filled games are what float to the top.

I'm most certainly not a fan of the Freemium model. The reason being that your money is spent on consumables (temporary in-game items that are quickly used up), rather than permanent benefits (ie, a license to play the full game all the way through with no ads).

In my opinion, the quality of a lot of games has suffered as well, with developers increasingly designing games that are insanely difficult unless you spend real money to buy lots of gimmicky "power-ups" to get through the level. Anyway, as a result I refuse to spend money on in-app purchases such as these, unless it gives me a permanent benefit (ie, unlocking a level pack or something).

I think there have been some decent games in the freemium model. I have only really paid for 1 game which was dragon mania legends. I did enjoy it at first but after a while like all freemium games it becomes more of a chore than fun.

I think Iron Blade: Medievel legends, a newer game by gameloft, is actually pretty decent. I haven't really engaged much in freemium games for a while. This one has something about it no doubt. I play it on pc through the MS store though. Not sure how much fun it would be on a mobile device.

the headline extols "creativity," yet the lede image shows a game which is just Yet Another Match Three game. The only "creative" thing King has done is figure out how to vacuum money out of the pockets of silly people.

What gets me is that my iPhone is definitely more powerful in near every metric than an Xbox 360/PS3 (except raw paper SIMD, for the cell, but the 360 never suffered for it, but that's a whole nother discussion). Those consoles were capable of putting out AAA blockbuster titles just fine.

Now that there's hundreds of Gflops burning a hole in my pocket (hopefully not literally), I want depth, man! What we usually get on phones is games you can get into and out of in minutes, shallow and quick, or freemium. Those can be ok waiting in a short line or something, but when you set down for a while, I want games with some depth on them, and using controllers like the gamevice.

Modern high end phones should be perfectly capable of good in depth experiences like that. If AAA titles were given the budget for them, they could be pretty Switch-ey.

I'm most certainly not a fan of the Freemium model. The reason being that your money is spent on consumables (temporary in-game items that are quickly used up), rather than permanent benefits (ie, a license to play the full game all the way through with no ads).

In my opinion, the quality of a lot of games has suffered as well, with developers increasingly designing games that are insanely difficult unless you spend real money to buy lots of gimmicky "power-ups" to get through the level. Anyway, as a result I refuse to spend money on in-app purchases such as these, unless it gives me a permanent benefit (ie, unlocking a level pack or something).

What bothers me about Freemium is how it's encroaching on paid games as well. On top of paying $60 for the base game a lot of multiplayer games have a cash-money based "coin" system for buying even more stuff that's not even wrapped up in other DLC packs. (EA is horribly guilty of this.) I can understand it for pay-once desktop MMOs since they have to pay the bills somehow after the initial purchase, but not for a more conventional game like Mass Effects: Andromeda.

And that's not getting into single-player games that have nickel-and-dime DLC in the micropayment range that add just enough gameplay features to make not getting them a detriment to the experience. (I'm looking at you Paradox Interactive.)

As said before, the lack of quality of games is one of the worst things for me. I feel like games were way better at the beginning. The harsh competition, the piracy and the overwhelming amount of games mean a game has to be free to be successful (or be really good and have the right buzz like Monument Valley or have a name that will sell, like Final Fantasy ports).

That lead to free games with ads or optionnal IAP, then to free games with mandatory IAP, then to free games with mandatory IAP and always online requirement.

Gamevil is the prime example of that for me: their first games were paid and good with great stories and no IAP, then they had a few completely optionnal IAP, then their games became free and basic essential items were paywalled. Now they release games that are basically copies of each others with different graphics and mandatory IAP if you want to do anything.

Fishlab is another example that did that same path in just two games :Galaxy on Fire 2 was paid and great with a few IAP, and 2 addons extensions. Several updates later, the game is free but has been tweaked so that you can't really make money anymore and needs to buy it and pops an ad every minute.GoF 3 went full always online IAP crazy.

Another sad part is that games get lost, especially iOS exclusive games. Older games don't support the latest iOS and/or they get pulled from the store, once your old device breaks, there is no way to play those games anymore, and I don't see any emulation helping us anytime soon. I really miss Wild Frontier and Hybrid 1 and 2.

I did enjoy it at first but after a while like all freemium games it becomes more of a chore than fun.

Exactly. And if you played the game a long time, you either spent lots of money or lots of time, or both, and it becomes hard to stop playing it because of how much you invested in it.

Cas in point, I played a TCG. Like all TCG, it's pay to win, but this one was less then other and you could get fairly good without paying. That combined with the fact the game had more PvE than PvP made it enjoyable despite the fact I couldn't not compete with most paying customers.

Obviously, I logged in every day to get the daily rewards, but after a few months, it became annoying to play everyday. But I was in the top 100 of the server and the game was still fun. But to keep the game fun, I had to continue progressing and continue playing everyday, until I relaized it became a real chore, and I played the game only because I had a good account I didn't want to abandon.

There are many awful mobile games, of course. I've found plenty that don't 'do evil', still, even if the chart toppers are inhabited by obviously cheap addictive junk like an arcade.

I think the criticism is a little harsh, because PC and console games were already going the DLC/expansion route, to say nothing of FACEBOOK games, that fad that brought farmville skinner boxes to every aunt, mom and grandma for a while.

King is a controversy in itself. My understanding is that they stole games, reskinned and renamed them and then sold them as their own and became a monster company from doing so. Makes me sick that they get positive attention for Candy Crush Saga.

Freemium has its place and some games have found a decent balance for their IAPs, but the majority of freemium games gouge customer wallets with little reward to the customer. I honestly don't understand how some of these games continue to make money.

A huge gripe for me is the affect it has on value of AAA games. It used to be you would pay $60 and own the entire experience. Then came downloadable content and IAPs and now a complete game experience can cost multiple $1000s, even a simple iOS/Android game that took the developer 2 weeks to make could sell billions of dollars in IAPs and cost an individual their entire paycheck.

As a developer, the potential opportunity initially sounds nice until you realize how improbable it is to break into the top of the market in 2017. Further when you feel you have to be a jerk and charge outrageous prices to the small community who is supporting you.

Freemium has created a cut-throat market full of people who seemingly have no souls.

I'm on Candy Crush level 1524 and haven't spent any money. I think in app purchases are fine as long as there are parental controls. I'm happy to let whales and impatient people pay for new content development and maintenance. I would have quit playing a long time ago if I had to pay every time Candy Crush released a new episode (set of levels).

I also played Hearthstone for years for free. I ended up buying 40 packs for the most recent release because it is so well done that I feel they just deserve the $50.

While I understand that mobile games are important I can't help but think they are a step in the wrong direction. Most of them are terrible. Truely awful. And many of the ones that succeed have the annoying or downright dangerous IAP model that you point out in the article. When you hear a mobile game designer talk about a game it is terrifying. They are often built to take advantage of people. the whales you mention in the article.

When I play a mobile game, I don't do it to have fun. I do it to kill time. They are like the reality television of games. You only watch it because it is on and when it is over you feel shallow for some reason.

The same thing is true for console and pc games. Most are just awful. And they cost as much as 75 times as much as a phone game. They’re not worth anywhere near that premium, I don’t care how much money is wasted developing them.

While I understand that mobile games are important I can't help but think they are a step in the wrong direction. Most of them are terrible. Truely awful. And many of the ones that succeed have the annoying or downright dangerous IAP model that you point out in the article. When you hear a mobile game designer talk about a game it is terrifying. They are often built to take advantage of people. the whales you mention in the article.

When I play a mobile game, I don't do it to have fun. I do it to kill time. They are like the reality television of games. You only watch it because it is on and when it is over you feel shallow for some reason.

The same thing is true for console and pc games. Most are just awful. And they cost as much as 75 times as much as a phone game. They’re not worth anywhere near that premium, I don’t care how much money is wasted developing them.

Pokemon Picross on the 3DS is the closest I've seen to freemium done right. It caps the amount spent on IAP at $40 which is the price it would have been as a retail release. Off course the problem with most iOS freemium games is that they aren't worth anything near that.

While I understand that mobile games are important I can't help but think they are a step in the wrong direction. Most of them are terrible. Truely awful. And many of the ones that succeed have the annoying or downright dangerous IAP model that you point out in the article. When you hear a mobile game designer talk about a game it is terrifying. They are often built to take advantage of people. the whales you mention in the article.

When I play a mobile game, I don't do it to have fun. I do it to kill time. They are like the reality television of games. You only watch it because it is on and when it is over you feel shallow for some reason.

The same thing is true for console and pc games. Most are just awful. And they cost as much as 75 times as much as a phone game. They’re not worth anywhere near that premium, I don’t care how much money is wasted developing them.

But there are some great phone games too.

I think the difference is that there isn't much coverage and reviews highlighting what is worth it on mobile compared to on PC and consoles.

While I understand that mobile games are important I can't help but think they are a step in the wrong direction. Most of them are terrible. Truely awful. And many of the ones that succeed have the annoying or downright dangerous IAP model that you point out in the article. When you hear a mobile game designer talk about a game it is terrifying. They are often built to take advantage of people. the whales you mention in the article.

When I play a mobile game, I don't do it to have fun. I do it to kill time. They are like the reality television of games. You only watch it because it is on and when it is over you feel shallow for some reason.

Mobile games can be much better than what they've become. I mean, $100 for a set of consumables and stuff that can yield crap (with a very high probability) or something awesome with probabilities that you have to scroll sideways to reach the first number different from zero. And sadly part of this is poisoning pc and console games. You buy a game and then you have shitloads of DLC to enhance your game that would cost several times the base game (which is already expensive as hell and often a rushed beta version). It can be done better.

As for me, I read about the game and check videos (if the developers are not on my 'black list' like EA, if they are I simply decide the game doesn't exist). Then I check whether there is DRM (I won't buy if at the very least the DRM isn't broken already), games with no DRM get full priority in my budget. Then I check if there aren't tons of DLC to extract money from gamers and if these DLCs are needed for better gameplay it's instantly added to the 'no-buy' list until there's any version that includes all DLC for a fair price and for that the game has to be really appealing. Then I consider pirating/buying (sometimes I pirate then buy, sometimes the pirated version shows me it isn't worth).

It shouldn't be that hard to buy games. It should be just a "wow, awesome work, take my money" matter.

The same thing is true for console and pc games. Most are just awful. And they cost as much as 75 times as much as a phone game. They’re not worth anywhere near that premium, I don’t care how much money is wasted developing them.

But there are some great phone games too.

Well it's true that sometimes you buy a game you don't like. For digital games, in certain, limited situations, you can get a refund from the distributor. In the case of physical games, you can usually sell them and recoup 2/3rds of the purchase price.

I think it goes without saying that some console/PC games with the traditional purchasing model are worth playing.

It's been debated quite a bit, but I too think games with a poor playtime / price ratio are worth less than games with a longer playtime. I can't think of a recent time where I was disappointed by this aspect of a game, though.

Mobile gaming is a malignant tumor on the gaming world. Toxic pricing strategies, pitifully repetitive and uninspired gameplay, rampant creative theft, intellectual bankruptcy, and all of this is showing a definite, poisonous influence on the rest of the videogame world.

You know the industry is an unflushed toilet when developers of reskinned ripoffs of Bejeweled and old flash games like Crush the Castle are the top performers year after year.

I wonder how many folks that "hate freemium" would pay $30/$40/$50 for a phone game sans IAP?

In my experience, my friends would filter their game searches by "free" first. Then scan for IAP. When I mention a fun, closed game that sells for $3.99 they guffaw at the concept of actually paying for a game on their phone.

The ecosystem has broken the mentality of the bulk of phone game players. As stated above, FB games are co-conspirators in this problem. I dare say it's unfixable.

I stick to full paid games with no IAP. And I pay for them. Games like "The Room" (1,2 and 3).

I have no problem paying for content I enjoy. I've spent $30 on Clash Royal since it came out 15 months ago. I enjoy the game. I play it a lot.

But let me be clear, IAP is NOT required to play the game. SuperCell has done an excellent job of ranking players and matching people against others of similar ability. Even if someone spent thousands of dollars, they would win a bunch of games, but they would quickly reach a point where they are matched against others with similar ability. Anyone who plays the game for 10 minutes understands this. Also, there are no adds.

The $30 I've spent on the game has been worth it to me. SuperCell makes great games (I enjoy Clash of Clans as well), and I'm happy to support the company.

So, if you don't like IAP, they don't play those games. But don't pretend there aren't great games with IAPs that are absolutely free to play.